hopper on 1/2/2010 at 10:53
Quote Posted by tartley
Hey Hopper. I wasn't intending to accuse you of backwardness.
Then we're cool, cos I was actually responding to Stronts (aka SD). :cool:
Now I don't think military exports or tourism revenue are good arguments for keeping your head of state a hereditary title, but that's really between y'all. At least you understood my point, which Stronts gloriously failed at.
*Zaccheus* on 10/2/2010 at 11:12
What have you done to ComChat? People debating issues calmly and sensibly!
Quote Posted by N'Al
sex education is mandatory in German schools
From what I remember it is also rather explicit.
Can't help agreeing it was a political move to seek asylum rather than a practical one though.
Quote Posted by tartley
For the record, the English Royal family makes more money for the UK than we spend on them
"Cause tourists are money!" as the Sex Pistols put it.
Quote Posted by SD
Clearly it only applies to people who are baptised into a church, since you're only allowed to be baptised if your family pays the tax.
Personally I think church membership should be something the state DOES NOT get involved in. I am very much in favour of seperation of church and state. In this case, though, they are using a service which is payed for by the tax.
Quote Posted by LittleFlower
As long as they don't try to base their politics and new laws on some fairy-tale book that they were brainwashed with in their youths.
Karl Marx's DAS KAPITAL ? :p
Yeah I know what you meant and to a certain extent I agree. You need to represent all your voters. However, where do you draw the line on general non-scientific ideology?
Quote Posted by LittleFlower
So basically, all politicians have to conform to the ubiquitous state-religion. Or else they have less, or no, chance of getting elected ?
It's a democracy. If a genius person persuaded enough people to vote for 'em, there would be no need for sticking 'oh and I love God & Country' at the end of sentences. Sadly those kinds of people go into business and make loads of money.
David on 10/2/2010 at 12:30
Just how explicit are we talking?
Are the Germans giving tips on technique to 8 year olds or something?
*Zaccheus* on 10/2/2010 at 14:15
I seem to remember them showing us detailed drawings of the, erm, internal mechanics of 'doing it' when I was in primary school (when I was 10 or 11). We were discussing the function of the clit in class. That kind of stuff.
No tips on technique though. :p
dvrabel on 10/2/2010 at 14:57
Quote Posted by tartley
Ha! I shall be appropriately circumspect then.
For the record, the English Royal family makes more money for the UK than we spend on them - it turns out they are a profitable operation. Partly through tourism, but mostly when they entertain foreign dignitaries who then order hundreds of British tanks or helicopters. Apparently military goods is one of our biggest exports. :-(
Tourists would visit whether there was a queen or not and arms deals are done with backhanders from BAE not handshakes by royalty.
N'Al on 10/2/2010 at 15:05
@ David:
In essence, it's somewhere between "the flowers and the bees" and hardcore porn.
Hope this helps.
[edit] In all seriousness, I remember having sex education twice whilst at school. Once was quite early on (probably when I was 10 or 11, as Zaccheus mentioned), and once a bit later (when I was probably around 16, I guess). The early 'session' involved a lot of giggling at pictures of women's naughty bits, whereas the later session actually involved discussions and, y'know, education. Can't tell you whether any of it is any more explicit than in other countries though, what with not having experienced school sex ed outside Germany. [/edit]
Gryzemuis on 28/2/2010 at 03:55
Quote Posted by LittleFlower
I believe the US voters would elect a woman to be President, before they would elect an atheist.
I believe the US voters would elect a muslim to be President, before they would elect an atheist.
Heck, I'm willing to bet the unbelievable: I bet the US voters will elect a black man to be President, before they would elect an atheist !!
(
http://friendsofirony.com/2010/02/04/ironic-photos-it-makes-sense-if-leave-out-logic/) Told you so !
june gloom on 28/2/2010 at 04:42
Hahahaha that is an EPIC troll.
Harvester on 1/3/2010 at 00:21
What's that internet law called that says it's impossible to distinguish actual religious fundamentalism from parodies of religious fundamentalism? It's proven yet again.
